Real Clear Politics  /  Real Clear Defense
October 25, 2013
   
Your Aircraft Carrier 
Is a Piece of Crap
Case studies in faulty  flattops
< 
by DAVID AXE 
Imposing, flexible, able to sail fast and launch devastating air  strikes 
at long range, aircraft carriers are the ultimate expression of national  
power. And many of the world’s best-armed countries are acquiring them. China,  
Russia, India, Brazil, the U.K., France, America. 
But just getting your hands on a flattop is hardly enough. For  every 
example of a country that succeeds in deploying a functional carrier and  
matching air wing, there’s a counter-example: a flattop hobbled by mechanical  
problems, stricken by age, sidelined by bad design or stuck with warplanes that 
 
simply don’t work. 
What follows are not the success stories. They are the case  studies in 
flattop failure … and object lessons for all the countries building  aircraft 
carriers today.Admiral Kuznetsov being monitored by a British  warship. Royal 
Navy photo  
Mother Russia’s tugboat bait
The Admiral Kuznetsov, Russia’s only aircraft carrier,  was launched in 
1985 and joined the fleet in 1991. Since then the 55,000-ton,  
fossil-fuel-powered flattop has managed just four frontline  deployments—all of 
them to the 
Mediterranean, and all of them just a few months  in duration. 
By contrast, American flattops typically deploy for at least six  months 
every two years. The nuclear-powered USS Enterprise,  commissioned in 1962, 
completed 25 deployments before leaving service in  2012. 
One of Admiral Kuznetsov’s major problems is her  powerplant. The vessel is 
powered by steam turbines and turbo-pressurized  boilers that Defense 
Industry Daily generously described as “_defective_ 
(http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Upgrading-the-Admiral-Russias-Kuznetsov-06305/)
 .” Anticipating 
breakdowns, large ocean-going tugs  accompany Admiral Kuznetsov whenever she 
deploys. 
Poor maintenance makes life difficult and dangerous for  Admiral Kuznetsov’
s 1,900 sailors. A short circuit started a fire off  Turkey in 2009 that 
killed one seaman. 
Her pipes are bad. “When it’s this cold, water freezes everywhere  
including pipes which may cause a rupture,” _English Russia reported._ 
(http://englishrussia.com/2012/03/30/ill-fame-of-the-aircraft-cruiser-admiral-kuznetsov/)
  “To prevent this, they just don’t  supply almost 60 percent of the 
cabins with water (neither in winter nor in  summer). The situation with 
latrines 
is just as bad. The ship has over 50  latrines but half of them are closed.”
 
Almost 2,000 men. Twenty-five latrines. Do the math. Training and  morale 
are so poor that in 2009 Admiral Kuznetsov sailors apparently  botched an 
at-sea refueling, _spilling hundreds of tons of fuel_ 
(http://www.emsa.europa.eu/csn-menu/csn-service/oil-spill-detection-examples/286-oil-spill-detection-e
xamples/1872-oil-spill-detection-examples-admiral-kuznetsov-february-2009.ht
ml)  into the Irish Sea... 
And even when the ship functions as intended, her design limits  her 
utility. Admiral Kuzentsov does not have steam catapults like  American 
flatttops 
do. Instead, her Sukhoi fighters launch into the air off a  bow ramp. The 
fighters must stay light, meaning they can carry only a few  air-to-air 
missiles and a partial fuel load. Their patrol endurance is measured  in 
minutes 
rather than hours. 
English Russia summed up the Russian aircraft carrier’s  fundamental 
limitations succinctly. “Actual aircrafts visit this ship pretty  rarely.” 
Moscow appreciates its flattop problem and has vague plans to  replace 
Admiral Kuznetsov sometime in the 2020s, by which time planners  can 
realistically expect to have deployed the decrepit old lady maybe two or  three 
more 
times.Vikramaditya. Wikimedia Commons  photo  
But the Russians promised us she would work
Admiral Kuznetsov’s ill repute did not deter the Indian  and Chinese 
governments from acquiring second-hand Russian carriers. China’s  Liaoning, a 
rebuilt sister ship of Admiral Kuznetsov, began  limited testing in the summer 
of 2012, serving a mostly educational role while a  Chinese shipyard _slowly  
built a new carrier from scratch_ 
(https://medium.com/war-is-boring/2a3fbfab3851) . 
Outfitted with the same faulty powerplant and  performance-limiting bow 
ramp, Liaoning is unlikely to venture far from  shore or send her 
lightly-loaded J-15 fighters—copies of Russian Sukhois—into  serious combat. In 
a rare 
pique, Chinese state media denounced the J-15s as “_flopping fish_ 
(http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130928/DEFREG/309280009/) .” 
India’s experience has been even worse. In 2004 New Delhi inked a  
$1.5-billion deal for the 1982-vintage Russian flattop Admiral  Gorshkov. In 
Russian 
service, the 45,000-ton vessel had carried a few  helicopters and small 
Yakovlev jump jets; the Indians paid to have the flight  deck expanded and a 
bow ramp fitted to accommodate up to 16 MiG-29 fighters. 
Renamed Vikramaditya, the flattop was due to enter  service in 2008. But 
the poorly-managed Russian shipyard was overwhelmed by the  scale of the 
refit. The cost doubled and trials were bumped back to September  2012. And 
when 
the crew pushed the conventionally-powered ship to her  theoretical top 
speed of 32 knots, her boilers overheated. 
“India didn’t want to use asbestos as heat protection for the  boilers,” 
_Defense Industry Daily explained._ 
(http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/ins-vikramaditya-may-hit-delay-cost-increases-03283/)
  “Instead, the boilers’  
designer had to use firebrick ceramics. Which, as we see, didn’t work so 
well.  Especially on a ship that Russia put up for sale in 1994, after a boiler 
 room explosion.” Our emphasis. 
More repairs. More delays. More money. “The problems revealed  during sea 
trials last year have been fixed,” Russian Deputy Prime Minister  Dmitry 
Rogozin vowed in late 2013, by which point Vikramaditya was  expected to enter 
active service in India in the spring of 2014. 
“Active service” being a relative term. If Russia’s own  experience with 
its crappy carriers is any indication, the Indian ship will  spend most of 
her time in port being repaired between brief forays into near  waters. New 
Delhi is building a new carrier from scratch that should eventually  
complement the Russian hand-me-down.Sao Paulo. Wikimedia Commons  photo  
The floating museum
Not all shitty aircraft carriers are Russian. The U.K.  and France have 
both sold to poorer navies decommissioned flattops that probably  should have 
been permanently retired. In 2000 the Brazilian navy acquired the  former 
Foch from Paris for $12 million. 
Commissioned into French service in 1963, the 33,000-ton,  non-nuclear Foch 
carried 40 fighters and helicopters. Unlike Russian  flattops, Foch had a 
steam catapult, allowing her to boost  heavily-laden planes off her deck. 
The Brazilians renamed her Sao Paulo and, for the first  four years, busily 
sailed the second-hand vessel in a series of regional  exercises—practicing 
with her upgraded A-4 fighters, sailing with the American  carrier USS 
Ronald Reagan and even qualifying Argentinian planes for  deck operations. Sao 
Paulo was, and remains, Latin America’s only  aircraft carrier. 
But her age began to show, despite Brazil spending an additional  $100 
million on upkeep. On-board fires in _2005_ 
(http://www.brazildispatch.com/2012/02/aircraft-carrier-sao-paulo-hit-by-fire.html)
  and _2012_ 
(http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-05/18/content_2968613.htm)  killed two 
sailors and 
left the flattop “barely  functioning beyond flag-flying and light duties,” 
according to Warships  International Fleet Review. “The Brazilian defense 
ministry admitted the  ship’s effectiveness is extremely limited.” Today the 
A-4s rarely fly. 
Sao Paulo’s replacement is still in the planning stages:  a brand-new 
carrier to enter service some time in the 2020s, around the same  time that 
Russia, China and India all hope to have new and better—that is to  say, safe 
and 
functional—flattops of their  own.

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to